We've got a lot of television content online as it is. Not only does Real have a premium service, but AOL for broadband does the same. I tried AOL for free (thanks a lot Gratis Networks!) a while ago and was really amazed at the videos you get. All kinds of stand-up, nature, music and so forth.
When I canceled AOL the guy asked me how I liked it. He claimed that he was a Linux user so he couldn't use AOL - I told him I was suprised with all of the stuff they offered for free (you know, with the monthly service). It is almost worth it just for that.
Oh, and don't forget that under Winamp you can watch all types of "Internet TV". Family Guy, Sealab, pr0n, Seinfeld, all kinds of stuff. Look for the Salt Water Chimp stations.
Seriously, I tried this service a while back and it works really well. So far I belive it only works on Windows, although Real has released a DRM-enabled client for Linux for quite some time ago. I know you hear DRM and groan - the service is worth the cost however. I believe it's $13/month with unlimited viewing of as many movies as you can download. The movies "expire" but that is expected - but they offer a live feed of the Starz channel along with it.
Almost as good as Netflix or Blockbuster online. Don't even have to send anything back. When it expires, you just can't play it. I think HBO should offer the same type of service, but they are owned by Time Warner (my local cable provider). Shame too, they have the most content and offer the most channels.
I don't think it will matter really. It is going to be about who uses the science and how much more work is done.
America no doubt spends a lot, if not the most, on medical research. Though, that is mostly because of the cancer, AIDS, diabetes and multiple sclerosis foundations, not to mention ALS, Autism, and so forth. However we aren't getting into stem cell (as an example) research as heavy as other countries because of a few Draconian measures and a Draculean* view of science (* Dra-cul-ean: of or relating to Dracula or his harsh way of impaling)
At one time England was the power of the world. But during the Victorian age they started to lose sight of what was important. Not only did they implode and go after pop culture (Oscar Wilde) but they didn't do enough with technology. When textiles was where the main technology happened, Germany and America started using techniques which revolutionized the dye industry.
They also started the modern chemisty-industry because of this, their advances and discoveries in dye making paved the way for more advanced chemicals (think drugs, Bayer AG). England is what it is now and America and Germany later became major powers (think about the time leading up to until WWI). If we don't do more in this area, if we rest on our laurels we are done for.
Are you happy with the quality of the candidates and debate we have seen recently, from either party? Most people aren't. That's a good sign of a system that could be improved.
I'd say most people are, considering most voted for George W. Bush. On the other hand, I really liked John Kerry... True, the system could be improved. Instant Run-off ballots, could be a good start.
I think banning all private funds in campaigns would be a good start too. I say if you want to support a candidate you take out a commercial or ad space in the newspaper. Make all campaigns tax supported, give every candidate an equal ammount of money. Free transportation to speaking events and debates....
I am a liberal, but I've been saying that ever since sixth grade or so when someone first explained to me what the electoral college was.
I'm a liberal but don't get all of us involved! If you haven't learned anything since the 6th grade, then I pity you.
The problem is that small states have too much power. There is already a provision to balance it out in Congress with each state having two senators. As for the presidency, I don't like the idea that someone's vote being worth more or less collectively than mine just because of our respective geographic locations.
Tough! All of these concerns were addressed hundreds of years ago. Everyone brought up these arguments but this way works best. The only thing that was total bullshit in the way the Constitution set things up was the 3/5ths of a person.
Plus, it has nothing to do with geography or the size of the states (a point you contradict in your own post). It's all about population, the thing that matters and the thing you want it to be based on.
in most states (all but one or two), there's no provision for splitting up the electoral vote. For example, Georgia has 13 electoral votes. It doesn't matter whether 50.1% or 99.9% of Georgia votes for George Bush, he gets all 13 electoral votes. Why does he not get 7 with the loser in Georgia getting 6? Because it's a dumb idea.
As there shouldn't be! I think that idea is un-Constitutional at best. If you split the electoral votes then you are back at the popular vote - duh.
And you're complaining that candidates would never visit small states? They hardly ever do now. How many trips did the candidates make to small states such as Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, etc. in 2004? And is it really better the way it is now, where candidates never visit non-battleground states?
I covered the election and that isn't true at all. Candidates hit every state, with Hawaii and Alaska getting visits from VP candidates (if anyone visits Alaska at all).
How about getting good candidates to run before you try to fix a non-broken system to elect them.
On a completely un-related note; last night I had some kids convinced that the Statue of Liberty had those spikes on her head to protect NYC from Nazi airships during WWII!
Linux ext3 tweaks - Opus Dei - free porn movies - cosign auto loan - mario - squirting mpeg videos - lighsaber - free amateur husband creampie wife sample videos
He actually said he "took the initiative in creating the internet"
Poor choice of words? Maybe, but Wired misquoted (libel!) him and put the word "Invented" in his mouth.
Either way, Al Gore did coin the phrase "Information Superhighway" and Eisenhower should get credit for the Internet because it's his vision of the Interstate system that was the fundamental idea that went into creating the Internet (and that was in like the 1950's!)
Slashdot Mirror
again, it's who takes off with the idea
In theory, a state could just appoint them without even HAVING a presidential election.
I bet Texas or Florida will do this first.
Let me add this:
We've got a lot of television content online as it is. Not only does Real have a premium service, but AOL for broadband does the same. I tried AOL for free (thanks a lot Gratis Networks!) a while ago and was really amazed at the videos you get. All kinds of stand-up, nature, music and so forth.
When I canceled AOL the guy asked me how I liked it. He claimed that he was a Linux user so he couldn't use AOL - I told him I was suprised with all of the stuff they offered for free (you know, with the monthly service). It is almost worth it just for that.
Oh, and don't forget that under Winamp you can watch all types of "Internet TV". Family Guy, Sealab, pr0n, Seinfeld, all kinds of stuff. Look for the Salt Water Chimp stations.
So do I, except it's legal.
Seriously, I tried this service a while back and it works really well. So far I belive it only works on Windows, although Real has released a DRM-enabled client for Linux for quite some time ago. I know you hear DRM and groan - the service is worth the cost however. I believe it's $13/month with unlimited viewing of as many movies as you can download. The movies "expire" but that is expected - but they offer a live feed of the Starz channel along with it.
Almost as good as Netflix or Blockbuster online. Don't even have to send anything back. When it expires, you just can't play it. I think HBO should offer the same type of service, but they are owned by Time Warner (my local cable provider). Shame too, they have the most content and offer the most channels.
I don't think it will matter really. It is going to be about who uses the science and how much more work is done.
America no doubt spends a lot, if not the most, on medical research. Though, that is mostly because of the cancer, AIDS, diabetes and multiple sclerosis foundations, not to mention ALS, Autism, and so forth. However we aren't getting into stem cell (as an example) research as heavy as other countries because of a few Draconian measures and a Draculean* view of science (* Dra-cul-ean: of or relating to Dracula or his harsh way of impaling)
At one time England was the power of the world. But during the Victorian age they started to lose sight of what was important. Not only did they implode and go after pop culture (Oscar Wilde) but they didn't do enough with technology. When textiles was where the main technology happened, Germany and America started using techniques which revolutionized the dye industry.
They also started the modern chemisty-industry because of this, their advances and discoveries in dye making paved the way for more advanced chemicals (think drugs, Bayer AG). England is what it is now and America and Germany later became major powers (think about the time leading up to until WWI). If we don't do more in this area, if we rest on our laurels we are done for.
Not sure about that...
I do know Vinton Cerf was the first person on the 'Net. He was the second PC. Before that it wasn't a network.
Or so he explained.
...like the worst security failure in US history...
Are you happy with the quality of the candidates and debate we have seen recently, from either party? Most people aren't. That's a good sign of a system that could be improved.
I'd say most people are, considering most voted for George W. Bush. On the other hand, I really liked John Kerry... True, the system could be improved. Instant Run-off ballots, could be a good start.
I think banning all private funds in campaigns would be a good start too. I say if you want to support a candidate you take out a commercial or ad space in the newspaper. Make all campaigns tax supported, give every candidate an equal ammount of money. Free transportation to speaking events and debates....
Especially when I also drive on I-275!
No, he's talking about that Napolean Dyn-o-mite!
The one that starred Jimmy Walker.
Do you mean anything like in Pakistan where there is no age floor for sex acts? Where you can legally sleep with 3 year olds?
Oh, sex outside of marriage is illegal, punishable by death though.
What are you retarded?!?!?
(that was funny if you read it with a Boston accent)
You mean "the robot"?
I'll be here all week!
I am a liberal, but I've been saying that ever since sixth grade or so when someone first explained to me what the electoral college was.
I'm a liberal but don't get all of us involved! If you haven't learned anything since the 6th grade, then I pity you.
The problem is that small states have too much power. There is already a provision to balance it out in Congress with each state having two senators. As for the presidency, I don't like the idea that someone's vote being worth more or less collectively than mine just because of our respective geographic locations.
Tough! All of these concerns were addressed hundreds of years ago. Everyone brought up these arguments but this way works best. The only thing that was total bullshit in the way the Constitution set things up was the 3/5ths of a person.
Plus, it has nothing to do with geography or the size of the states (a point you contradict in your own post). It's all about population, the thing that matters and the thing you want it to be based on.
in most states (all but one or two), there's no provision for splitting up the electoral vote. For example, Georgia has 13 electoral votes. It doesn't matter whether 50.1% or 99.9% of Georgia votes for George Bush, he gets all 13 electoral votes. Why does he not get 7 with the loser in Georgia getting 6? Because it's a dumb idea.
As there shouldn't be! I think that idea is un-Constitutional at best. If you split the electoral votes then you are back at the popular vote - duh.
And you're complaining that candidates would never visit small states? They hardly ever do now. How many trips did the candidates make to small states such as Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, etc. in 2004? And is it really better the way it is now, where candidates never visit non-battleground states?
I covered the election and that isn't true at all. Candidates hit every state, with Hawaii and Alaska getting visits from VP candidates (if anyone visits Alaska at all).
How about getting good candidates to run before you try to fix a non-broken system to elect them.
(I say Gore-Clinton in 2008!!!)
I just knew the link because I saw the same story everywhere else. (I didn't RTFA)
On a completely un-related note; last night I had some kids convinced that the Statue of Liberty had those spikes on her head to protect NYC from Nazi airships during WWII!
Why not post the link to the Current TV homepage?
It's pretty, and it the layout works with Firefox (unlike some sites)
I say put it in the ticker (news crawl):
Linux ext3 tweaks - Opus Dei - free porn movies - cosign auto loan - mario - squirting mpeg videos - lighsaber - free amateur husband creampie wife sample videos
(Based on eal dogpile searches)
He actually said he "took the initiative in creating the internet"
Poor choice of words? Maybe, but Wired misquoted (libel!) him and put the word "Invented" in his mouth.
Either way, Al Gore did coin the phrase "Information Superhighway" and Eisenhower should get credit for the Internet because it's his vision of the Interstate system that was the fundamental idea that went into creating the Internet (and that was in like the 1950's!)
Yeah, because Al Gore is giving out so many contract now a days huh?
Credit for Internet funding by Vinton Cerf & Robert Kahn:
http://tinyurl.com/65ssc
You should always trust your security to outside companies.
Jurassic Park - DataEast
Star Wars - DataEast
The best machines, from DataEast, were the movie machines because they had all of your favorite lines.
"Shoot the Death Star", "Ian Freeze!", ah that was fun. It was like being part of the movie (not really, but fun!)
Internet Pinball Database:
http://www.ipdb.org/